Pulled Over

[drillsgt]

Because with most everything else I've seen so far here involving LEO's, this has been blown way out of proportion. IE, an officer here telling a person to file a formal complaint on another officer when he only has ONE side of the story after the officer was admittedly polite and gave the original poster a break with the ticket.

We wouldn't want to mess with that thin blue line and all...

 

[Roll Tide]

LEO hate... really... because I demand that a LEO follow the law, AND THE CONSTITUTION. That I feel that any LEO that breaks the law in performance of their duties be criminally liable for their illegal actions, that makes me a non-Christian?

So, you've NEVER broken any law? Ever? Or, every time you broke the law, you got busted? Really? In Indiana? We have entirely TOO much uninhabited land, for that to happen.

 

[Bunnykid68]

Please read that line again. I WOULD BE GRATEFUL FOR THE LESSER TICKET AND MOVE ON.

I have nothing to hide in my vehicles. I don't think he was looking for anything. He was looking for a way to keep the ammo separate from the gun, until he could safely leave. PEOPLE ARE CRAZY. Want and example. Go hang out in Lafayette.

He should not have needed to look for a place to keep the ammo separate from the gun, he should have never confiscated it in the 1st place.

 

[littletommy]

Nope, I think it's just pretty pathetic that people jump imediately to the "file a formal complaint" BS right from the get go. It's just a generational thing these days....people like to whine a lot

I haven't gone back and read the earlier posts in the thread, but wasn't a cop one of the first who advised the OP to file a complaint?

edit: I see where you addressed that.

 

[Tinner666]

I maybe should have said my shop is in the worst part of town, and my house isn't much better. I'm looking a pic right now I took from the 'wrong' side of a police tape, of another body in my front yard. Maybe it's the area in general, but I 'interact' a few dozen times a year with LEOs.
I've been disarmed. I've been surrounded by 12-15 LEO's with guns drawn pointed at me from 8-10 feet away. I've also been told to keep my weapon in my holster and basically ignored after that. Oh, I had 4-5 draw on me when I reloaded one time before any of them left.

Be polite, they'll be polite and I think even respect you a bit too.

 

[Bunnykid68]

I guess the OP should be happy he didnt get pulled over by someone like former Officer Harless

 

[JMoses]

I haven't gone back and read the earlier posts in the thread, but wasn't a cop one of the first who advised the OP to file a complaint?

Yeah I know, pretty shamefull isn't it.

 

[drillsgt]

He asked me if I was a police officer. I said no and handed him my LTCH, at the same time handed him my license and registration. At that point, he didn't ask, just took the zippered case from the door pocket and said, "I trust you, but I am going to hold this until we are finished".

This is funny, I trust you but everything I do from here on out shows I don't trust you.

 

[Cameramonkey]

This is the type of behavior that needs to be corrected. There is no legal or articulable reason for the officer to have taken your gun. Unless he has a reason that he can articulate as to why he needs to remove the firearm from your area of control, he should leave it be. "Officer safety" doesn't count as an articulable reason. Many officers are doing this kind of thing "just because that's how we have always done it" and that's not acceptable. Departments are getting sued because officers are damaging expensive guns doing this kind of thing. I know that my department has paid-out several settlements for damaged guns, one on an Ed Brown 1911 that was dropped as it was being taken for "officer safety". You need to file a formal, written complaint with the Chief of Police about this incident, that's the only way this kind of behavior will get changed. I don't know how things work in Hammond, but send a copy of your complaint to the Mayor, City Council, or whomever has a seat at the policy table along with the Chief.

+1. I understand why the officer felt the need to hold the OPs weapon. I dont agree, but I understand. Why it needed to even be unzipped is beyond me. Why it wasnt returned back to its original location in its original condition is puzzling. Officer just ran his license, knows he isnt a serious threat. Why all the extra precautions? He afraid that OP was a hothead and a sleeper that would attack him after he was lenient? How often does THAT happen? Of all the wild videos Ive seen, not a one happened AFTER the ticket was accepted and the officer headed back to his car.

Two things I wonder. Kinda wondering if he was fishing by wanting to put the gun in the glove box, and I also wonder if there is a record of the gun being run for stolen? Officer a fisherman? Given the comments about gangbangers in the area, I really wonder if it wasnt officer safety, but fishing for stolen weapons? Ya cant run the serial if you dont take it back to the patrol car.

Lying to the police about facts pertinent to a criminal investigation is illegal. Lying to a officer asking if a gun is in the car during a traffic infraction stop, which in of itself is not a criminal investigation only an "officer safety" issue is NOT.

Gunner

Sounds reasonable on the surface. Lets ask the pros... VUpdblue? Frank? Kirk? Houghmade? your professional opinions?

Why did he unload the handgun ?

Exactly! Winner winner, chicken dinner! If he HAD to take it for his safety, he was compromising that safety even unzipping the case.

Haven't had a ticket in 20+ years. I wonder what they look like now.

State police give you a 8 1/2 x 11 computer printout. You know what sucks? In this day and age of instant data transfer, even though its done on the computer and your data is checked in real time, the ticket upload isnt. I got one last summer and it took almost 30 days to even show up in the computers for me to pay it. I screwed up and wasnt paying attention, so I was ready to pay the piper when I got to my office 30 minutes later and be done with it. No record of the interaction. Two weeks later, STILL no record of the infraction on the servers. Even though I told it to email me when it showed up, it still didnt and I almost missed the deadline to pay.

How did this turn into an illegal search? From the OP, the officer placed the gun on or under the seat and decided to put the magazine in the glove box. If he were rummaging through the glove box, I understand the concern. The Hammond area is not a great area and I agree with Roll Tide. Some things were not handled in a great way but the officer was professional, the OP was let off for a lesser charge. He could have made the 14 and over stick and didn't. What I don't understand is why the OP left out the most important details in the original thread. The emptying of the gun and all was stated later.

He entered the vehicle without consent or reasonable suspicion on false pretense. He should have put it back where he found it in the exact condition he found it. You'd be surprised what you can see just opening a door, cover, glove box, center console. Often it takes no rummaging to see everything you want to see.

 

[KG1]

Officer: Mind if I search your vehicle? You have nothing to hide, right? It would make this stop go so much quicker and if you let me search your vehicle I will give you a break on the ticket.

Sound like a deal?

 

[Tinner666]

I will fess up that a lot of my interactions also come from be calling PD, or being on/in the scene of a crime.

 

[littletommy]

Yeah I know, pretty shamefull isn't it.

No, not particularly.

 

[Bunnykid68]

Yeah I know, pretty shamefull isn't it.

Not shameful at all. VUPD understands there is no reason to disarm someone just because he pulled them over for speeding and not acting suspiciously. What is shameful is that some people think it is ok for ones property to be confiscated for no good reason.

 

[KG1]

Officer: Mind if I search your vehicle? You have nothing to hide, right? It would make this stop go so much quicker and if you let me search your vehicle I will give you a break on the ticket.

Sound like a deal?

You: Suuure, why not. I have nothing to hide and I sure would like to get that ticket reduced.

 

[JMoses]

Not shameful at all. VUPD understands there is no reason to disarm someone just because he pulled them over for speeding and not acting suspiciously. What is shameful is that some people think it is ok for ones property to be confiscated for no good reason.

Oh...I didn't know that VUPD was there and knew that the OP is telling everything? Not saying that he's lying by any means, but it is just one side of the story. JMO

 

[MDave]

"Slightly over the limit" should be in purple.

What does "In purple" mean? Sorry just a newby reader....

 

[Bunnykid68]

Oh...I didn't know that VUPD was there and knew that the OP is telling everything? Not saying that he's lying by any means, but it is just one side of the story. JMO

Cops never disarm people they pull over and all the stories we hear on INGO are one sided but they must have all been doing something to warrant being disarmed and having their guns emptied and in some cases taken apart.

 

[Tinner666]

Officer: Mind if I search your vehicle? You have nothing to hide, right? It would make this stop go so much quicker and if you let me search your vehicle I will give you a break on the ticket.

Sound like a deal?

Last time I heard that, I told he had to promise NOT to confiscate my grenades, rocket launchers, or AR's. If you'll ignore them, I'll let you search. He declined to search after asking if that was all I had.

 

[Cameramonkey]

Read the ingo rules and FAQ Mdave and you will understand. Purple implies sarcasm.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...es-forum-tips-please-read-before-posting.html

 

[VUPDblue]

Maybe you should get the officers name from the original poster so you can drop him a message that you're the one that encouraged him to file a complaint on him.

Because with most everything else I've seen so far here involving LEO's, this has been blown way out of proportion. IE, an officer here telling a person to file a formal complaint on another officer when he only has ONE side of the story after the officer was admittedly polite and gave the original poster a break with the ticket.

Yeah I know, pretty shamefull isn't it.

You must be from the oooooooollllddddd school of copping. "just because that's how we've always done it" doesn't hold water anymore. I was a pretty stiff 2A supporter before I began my career in LE and the uniform I now wear won't change that. Some lines in the sand are blurry and some are not. The 4th amendment is pretty clear and is not one of those blurry lines in the sand. Common sense as well as the high courts have ruled that taking property from a person without reasonable and articulable cause is unlawful. Simply stating that you remove a weapon for "officer safety" when no articulable threat to the officer exists is not proper or lawful. Departments around the country are reshaping their policies to handle this exact issue. The first of the departments to implement these changes were seen as leaders and progressive. Now most departments are coming on-board and those that are not will eventually face consequences of that inaction. I would be more than happy to have a talk with the officer that the OP posted about. My suggestion for the OP to file a formal complaint was not to get the officer in hot water, but to light a fire under the department to get on-board with following the constitution. I don't care if the OP was honest and truthful about every detail of his encounter, but in making a suggestion about a course of action, his word is all I have to go on. Hell, the whole thing could be hypothetical. Makes no difference to me, my response is still the same. The officer's politeness has nothing to do with this at all, nor does his giving the OP a break on the citation. If I smile at you and make small talk while I kick you in the balls, I'm still kicking you in the balls. Seizing a firearm on a simple traffic stop where there is no reasonable and articulable concern that the person being stopped is a danger to the officer is illegal. Period. I disagreed with more than one FTO when I was in training about this issue and I didn't back down. Now my department has given us formal training that succinctly states that my opinion was the correct one. I stand behind my position on complaining about the incident but I will clarify the point that I believe the complaint should be about the department's incorrect policy, or lack of policy, on this situation.